Benchmark: object functions vs if statements 3

Tests:

Object
const someOp = () => { console.info('boi') } const ops = { 0: someOp, 1: () => null, 2: () => null, 3: someOp, } for (let i = 0; i < 4; i++) { ops[i](); }
If statement
const someOp = () => { console.info('boi') } const enter = 0; const exit = 3; for (let i = 0; i < 4; i++) { if (i === enter) { someOp(); } else if (i === exit) { someOp(); } }
Object (optional chain)
const someOp = () => { console.info('boi') } const ops = { 0: { func: someOp, }, 3: { func: someOp, } } for (let i = 0; i < 4; i++) { ops[i]?.func(); }

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Object
If statement
Object (optional chain)

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

No previous run results

This benchmark does not have any results yet. Be the first one to run it!

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Measuring the performance of JavaScript code is crucial in understanding how different approaches and libraries impact execution speed.

Let's break down the provided JSON benchmark:

**Benchmark Definition:**

The test cases are designed to compare the performance of three approaches:

1. **Object Functions**: This approach uses an object with functions as values. The function is called repeatedly using a for loop.
2. **If Statements**: This approach uses if statements to determine which function to call based on a condition.
3. **Optional Chain (Object)**: This approach uses optional chaining (`?.`) to access the `func` property of objects in an object.

**Options Compared:**

* Object functions vs if statements
* Object functions with and without optional chaining

**Pros and Cons:**

1. **Object Functions**:
	* Pros: Can be more concise, easier to read.
	* Cons: May have performance overhead due to function lookups.
2. **If Statements**:
	* Pros: Can be more efficient if the condition is true most of the time.
	* Cons: Can lead to slower performance for frequent false positives.
3. **Optional Chain (Object)**:
	* Pros: Reduces the need for explicit null checks, can improve readability.
	* Cons: May have a slight performance overhead due to optional chaining.

**Library and Syntax Considerations:**

The test cases use JavaScript's built-in `console.info` function to log messages. There is no specific library used in these examples.

However, it's worth noting that some libraries like Lodash or Ramda might be used to implement similar logic in a more concise way.

There are no special JS features or syntax used in these test cases. They rely on standard JavaScript constructs.

**Alternatives:**

If you're looking for alternatives to benchmark JavaScript performance, here are a few options:

1. **Benchmarking libraries**: Libraries like Benchmark.js, Microbenchmark, or jsperf can provide more advanced features and flexibility.
2. **Browser-specific benchmarks**: Browsers often have their own built-in benchmarking tools or APIs that allow you to create custom benchmarks.

For measuring JavaScript performance, it's essential to choose a suitable benchmarking library or approach that aligns with your specific use case and goals.

Related benchmarks:

object functions vs if statements 3 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Object vs If statement vs Object (optional chain)

Created: 5 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Object

If statement

Object (optional chain)

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

No previous run results

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):